Normally I'd do a TLDR section... but I think I'll skip that for now. So if you don't want to read... don't

I'd like to start a bit of a discussion regarding The Way Things Are, and whether that Way should continue. In particular I'd like to explore (no pun intended) the current drop system and some of the logic behind it.
Currently here is how things stand (as I understand it):
Explore gets a drop bonus over whistle.
Groups get a drop bonus over solo.
Guild Only groups get a larger drop bonus than normal groups.
Currently there seems to be a bit of a problem with the way the drop bonuses are structured. Logically the whistle vs explore bonus is correct. Whistle is a faster climb, but lower drops. However, the solo vs group rates don't make sense for the state of today's game. When groups were first introduced, this drop bonus was implemented as an incentive to group up. Subsequent updates have changed how the game is played and shifted the game (I believe) in the direction that Paul wanted it to go. Groups are the primary vehicle through which the game is now played.
So I ask the question... Why is there still a drop bonus for groups? Groups have the ability to climb substantially faster than solo players, thus the GP to Time Invested ratio is much higher for players who are able to play with a group. Why is there an added drop benefit as well?
This has the effect of widening the gap between those players who have been playing for a while and have good gear and those who have not and do not.
Here are the challenges that face a new player today, assuming he isnt coming in with 10,000 fg:
He or she cannot afford good gear, or even grinder gear in some cases.
He or she cannot slash with a group in most cases. If your gear isnt good people dont want to "Carry you" to MQ. Understandable, but not conducive to growing the player base either.
He or she faces an enormous challenge in finding their own gear through a solo climb.
He or she faces an enormous challenge in generating fg through a solo climb in order to purchase better gear. Selling skillables @ 1 fg might generate as much as 30-40 fg in a solo climb, but that climb can take weeks.
Now consider this, what would be the effect of reversing the drops bonus for groups, or even just increasing solo to the level of groups?
No longer would there be a GP AND drop benefit to groups. The benefit of group climbs would be solely the speed of the climb.
For players who have a choice (I.E. they have good gear) Solo would become a type of "magic find" run. An endeavor undertaken to generate FG at the expense of climb time.
Beginners would enjoy multiple benefits:
He or she would have an easier time making self found climbs to begin their slashing careers
He or she would generate more fg, not only through selling what decent items they find, but also due to the increase drop rates they would earn more FG per climb selling skillables
And here is the big one... I believe that in making the game easier to start, the player base will increase (again) over time, meaning MORE GROUPS, meaning groups of players with non-elite gear would form more often, which means the item threshold for being able to find a group would be lower.
The bottom line for every single player that plays LS is that more players = a better game. Even the elite players see benefits like:
More skillables on market
More players = higher chance that someone finds upgrades for your already awesome gear and you can finally buy that 250ee focused heal you've been dying to get your hands on but doesnt currently exist
More demand for items
Now I am sensitive to the fact that many of you who regularly group climb would be upset to see a drop rate decrease for groups. I believe the benefits outweigh that loss, however thats not entirely what I am suggesting. I believe the best way to put this into effect would be to keep the group rates where they are, and to increase the Solo rates so that the ratio is reversed. Basically if the rates are currently roughly solo 1 : group 2, increase solo to a ratio of solo 4 : group 2.
In conclusion:Paul has long said that he is building this game towards something. This end point is not something that any of us know, so its hard to say how a change like this would fit, or not fit, into his vision for the game... But either way none of that matters if no one is left to play the game once he's reached that point. I know he's said before that he doesnt care, and that if only he and his son play when he is finished he's fine with that... But I dont think thats a very genuine statement. I doubt he would be happy with putting so much time and effort into a game that ultimately failed. Also considering the emphasis he's built on group play... Well I just believe that growing the player base is far more important than any other considerations at this point. I also believe that a game can only thrive when the game's economy is thriving, and that a change like this would go a long way towards giving LS a good kick in the nads

And yeah, I'm aware that sometime in the last few years this has probably been suggested before but I'm bored and it entertains me to write.